|
|
Post by 16joy on Jul 22, 2017 2:27:07 GMT
I just read this article in the ajc about a judge offering a reduction in jail time if an inmate gets a vasectomy or a birth control implant. He said he was tired of men not paying child support and babies born with drugs in their system. There was another reason for men but it escapes me at the moment. Judge said this would allow them to get their life back on track.
I'm surprised a judge has this kind of latitude in his sentences. Apparently, 32 men have taken him up on his offer already.
|
|
|
|
Post by busy on Jul 22, 2017 2:41:02 GMT
I think it’s pretty gross, frankly. And it has nothing to do with their crimes so I don’t think it should be allowed.
|
|
|
|
Post by roxley on Jul 22, 2017 3:07:42 GMT
I think it is totally wrong and shouldn't happen...........but kind of love it at the same time.  His idea is that it is reversible (I have no idea how reliable a vasectomy reversal is) in three years (how long the implant lasts) and that gives them time without unwanted pregnancies to get their lives on track. I think his heart is in the right place, but people shouldn't feel forced. I wonder how many young people would just choose one of these options voluntarily if we offered it for free to the general public? Can't get pregnant or knock someone up, and don't have to worry about finding birth control in the heat of the moment? Pro life people should be all over that! Less unwanted pregnancies means fewer abortions. I think we should offer it too everyone. |
|
|
|
Post by Lexica on Jul 22, 2017 4:24:26 GMT
Wait, he is doing this as he sends them into jail, and an implant is supposed to last for 3 years? It isn't like they will be reproducing while in jail. I suppose it may be a good thing in some cases. I wonder how long the average jail sentence is. And I hope they cannot come back and sue him down the road for this.
Now, if he wanted to do forced castration for rapists and child molesters, I could get behind that.
|
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Jul 22, 2017 4:51:11 GMT
I'm absolutely shocked!!  And appalled!! |
|
|
|
Post by LavenderLayoutLady on Jul 22, 2017 5:49:57 GMT
I don't think it's right. The judge holds too much power and they're making a choice they probably wouldn't have without the offer of reduction of their sentence.
|
|
|
|
Post by shescrafty on Jul 22, 2017 10:37:24 GMT
I think it is great.
But I am also typically a crunchy liberal that believes that to receive welfare a person should have the implant or IUD to try and help from having more children while on assistance.
Which I know is terribly unpopular and will never happen, but I still think that if a person can't afford the children they have they should not bring more kids into that situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by littlemama on Jul 22, 2017 11:01:50 GMT
While I believe that all types of birth control should be available and free to anyone who wants it, I have a hard time getting behind bribing select people to use birth control. I also can't imagine that it is legal.
|
|
|
|
Post by scrapqueen01 on Jul 22, 2017 11:25:51 GMT
Birth control would stop babies from being created but how would it make them financially responsible? We know there are people who won't be just because they don't care.
|
|
|
|
Post by bazinga on Jul 22, 2017 11:27:50 GMT
As someone who works with children of parents that have been in and out of jail, I fully support the judge. I wish we could do more to keep violent and repeat criminals from having any/more children, as they are the ones who suffer the most and often follow in their parents' footsteps. I also agree that if you can't afford the children you have then you shouldn't have any more.
|
|
dawnnikol
Prolific Pea
'A life without books is a life not lived.' Jay Kristoff
Posts: 7,871
Sept 21, 2015 18:39:25 GMT
|
Post by dawnnikol on Jul 22, 2017 11:48:18 GMT
I totally support that judge.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 22, 2017 11:54:26 GMT
I can't get worked up about this. He's giving the offenders a choice, not forcing it on them.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 23:44:45 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2017 13:20:44 GMT
An unwanted child and/or a child whose parent does not have the emotional intelligence to care for it is the cause of emotional brokenness, misery, and sometimes violence when the child is grown. And the cycle goes on and on and on.
It is hard enough to do justice to a child when you want them w/all your heart. Because even then, the parent may not be suited to the job of creating a child w/stable wiring. Let alone when the parent doesn't want/can't care for the child.
|
|
|
|
Post by mom on Jul 22, 2017 13:22:48 GMT
I'm cool with it. It's a choice. It isn't being forced on them.
|
|
Mystie
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,299 
|
Post by Mystie on Jul 22, 2017 15:21:43 GMT
I think it is great. But I am also typically a crunchy liberal that believes that to receive welfare a person should have the implant or IUD to try and help from having more children while on assistance. Which I know is terribly unpopular and will never happen, but I still think that if a person can't afford the children they have they should not bring more kids into that situation. I think it's great, too, and yes, I am a crunchy liberal. Well, more fluffy than crunchy...  And I think this should also be a choice available to women convicted of crimes as well. |
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 22, 2017 15:24:33 GMT
Since it isn't a requirement, I'm all for it for non violent offenders. I've seen the emotional toll having a parent in jail has on my students.
I'd like to see if offered to women as well.
|
|
dawnnikol
Prolific Pea
'A life without books is a life not lived.' Jay Kristoff
Posts: 7,871
Sept 21, 2015 18:39:25 GMT
|
Post by dawnnikol on Jul 22, 2017 19:23:02 GMT
I think it is great. But I am also typically a crunchy liberal that believes that to receive welfare a person should have the implant or IUD to try and help from having more children while on assistance. Which I know is terribly unpopular and will never happen, but I still think that if a person can't afford the children they have they should not bring more kids into that situation. I think it's great, too, and yes, I am a crunchy liberal. Well, more fluffy than crunchy... And I think this should also be a choice available to women convicted of crimes as well. The judge offered it to women and men. I want to say it was 38 women took him up on the offer and 32 men or vise versa? Either way! |
|
teddyw
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,820
|
Post by teddyw on Jul 23, 2017 0:04:42 GMT
I think another reason he offered it was because addiction is hereditary a lot so they wouldn't be passing that along.
I can't decide if I'm all for it. His reasoning does have good points though.
|
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Jul 23, 2017 1:41:09 GMT
It doesn't bother me. It is a choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Jul 23, 2017 23:15:41 GMT
This is all kinds of grey for me.
Putting aside if it's right or wrong, legal or not, is the fact that the men are being given a very different choice than the women. A vasectomy, which could mean never having the chance to have another child vs. an implant that lasts 3 years.
And then there's good and bad to that as well. If any particular guy never gets his life together, then maybe he's glad to never worry about having kids again, while the women may find herself 3 years down the road with no more birth control and no easy means of paying for more. I don't know.
But then the flip side is if they both later become well-adjusted, responsible members of society and wish to have another child, it will likely be much easier for the woman than the man.
And then you bring back in the right vs wrong, legal vs. illegal aspects and I'm left thinking that most arguments both for and against it seem to make some amount of sense to me, even if they are complete opposites of one another.
|
|
|
|
Post by chaosisapony on Jul 23, 2017 23:21:29 GMT
I think it's great since it is an option being presented, not a requirement. The article I read a few days ago said the sentence reduction is 30 days. So to me, not a huge enough amount of time that it would put pressure on someone to do something they didn't want to do. I think the judge's heart is in the right place.
|
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Jul 23, 2017 23:23:37 GMT
I'm in support of this.
|
|
craftymom101
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,620
|
Post by craftymom101 on Jul 23, 2017 23:43:04 GMT
The judge isn't forcing anyone so I don't see a problem with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by chances on Jul 24, 2017 0:02:21 GMT
A choice isn't free if there is coercion. There is a huge power imbalance--the government literally has the power to deprive a person of their liberty. Biases about who is fit to reproduce get entangled in these type of policies-- government shouldn't be in the business of controlling the reproduction (even through coersive choices) of people it deems unworthy. Besides the moral argument, history has shown what a slippery slope this is.
|
|
|
|
Post by jenis40 on Jul 24, 2017 1:48:02 GMT
There are lots of shades of gray with this. It is a choice, albeit one with a bit of coercion along side it. A vasectomy reversal has a 50% chance of success within 3 years and 30% chance in ten years. I think the implants have better odds of successful pregnancy after use but there are still risks. As long as everything is properly explained, I say let the offer be made. I think in the long run, it will do more good than harm.
|
|
|
|
Post by iteach3rdgrade on Jul 24, 2017 4:21:14 GMT
I can't get worked up about this. He's giving the offenders a choice, not forcing it on them. Exactly! |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 23:44:45 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 4:37:15 GMT
I have no problem with this.
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jul 24, 2017 4:44:37 GMT
I have no problem with this. I'm tired of low lifes who have several children they have no intention of caring for.
My sister's friend has had custody of her nephew since he was a couple of months old. Both birth parents are drug addicts with long criminal histories and several children between them (she has 6 or 7 and he has 5) that have been raised by the system.
My sister's friend had the boy for about a year and got a call from CPS: there was another baby boy in the system from this woman, though with a different father. The birth mother's parental rights were terminayed after she missed several court hearings and failed several drug tests. She just went back to jail for a parole violation, and guess What? She's pregnant again.
These people have had plenty of opportunities to get their lives together, or to at least avail themselves of some kind of birth control method.
I don't know the answer to this, but I'm sick of hearing about people who breed indiscriminately and the excuses that are made for those people.
|
|
courtney
Shy Member
Posts: 36
|
Post by courtney on Jul 24, 2017 4:48:39 GMT
It might be a"choice" but a choice with strings attached
When there is an obvious benefit this is plain and clear coercion
This is fucked up on multiple levels
|
|
And appalled!! 
